On 21 Nov 2001 10:29:57 -0800, shomeeks@yahoo.com (sdiver) wrote:

> I have been lurking out here for a while and have read reviews of
>both the TRV30 and TRV900 (including Mr. Beale's excellent site). Yet
>I cannot make up my mind, and I would like to know if the difference
>in price came down to $200.00 or less, which one would netizens
>recommend most. I would like to stress that I need good low light
>performance (baby sleeping in the crib at night kinda stuff) for this
>camera. Also my wife is a multimedia major, and she can get creative
>with video or stills in the future. I also enjoy photography (35mm)
>so the camera should be able to make decent still for the web or
>printing.

Various Mini-DV camcorders are critically reviewed at:
www.David-Ruether-Photography.com/camcorder-comparison.htm
The TRV30 is not there yet. I've shot the comparison
footage, but haven't gotten around to writing the
comparison of the five basic Sony imaging types...
Short version: the VX-2000 has the smoothest and
highest-res. picture (the TRV-900 looks close,
having higher picture contrast); the PC100 and TRV30
pictures are almost as sharp (with the PC9 being
noticeably less sharp), but show considerably
more "busy" effects, like "flapping" on scan lines,
stairstepping, etc. (this is the biggest negative
for me with the TRV30); the color of all is very
good, with the 3-chippers being a bit better
(same for "tonality"); the low-light ability of
the 3-chippers is very noticeably better than the
one chippers; all but the PC9 level produce excellent
640x480 images, but not larger (the megapixel
images from the PC100-TRV30 show excessive color
noise) - this means that decent paper prints are
quite small in size. For what you specify, there is
either the VX2000 (best), or the TRV900 (probably
good enough, at a lower price...).